***Official*** Australia in England (The Ashes)

[pskov]

Now, this is a tail.

Thank you Neil, I had virtually purged those dark days from my memory.

Thinking about it now, even Bangladesh's current side bats further down than 5 (waits for Richard....).

 

[aussie]

Test Batting Averages Since January 2003:

Giles 25.77
Hoggard 10.50
Jones 9.50
Harmison 13.05
Total 60.82

Warne 13.33
Lee 15.66
Gillespie 20.32
McGrath 11.36
Total 60.67

Suggests you're talking biased rubbish. Again.

no, their is nothing baised about that at all, its a fair comment though i must say these figures are shocking, lets compare them 1 on 1.

Warne vs Gilo - Giles has a slight edge here
Lee vs Hoggard - Lee surely
Dizzy vs Jones - Dizzy has the egge
Harmison vs Pigeon - Harmison wins

so overall its fairly even, but which tail do u think will do better???

 

[SpaceMonkey]

no, their is nothing baised about that at all, its a fair comment though i must say these figures are shocking, lets compare them 1 on 1.

Warne vs Gilo - Giles has a slight edge here
Lee vs Hoggard - Lee surely
Dizzy vs Jones - Dizzy has the egge
Harmison vs Pigeon - Harmison wins

so overall its fairly even, but which tail do u think will do better???

For Lee vs Hoggard it depends what you want from the tailender.
If it was to score runs then Lee by a mile, but if you wanted someone to just not get out while a proper batsmen could score at the other end id go for Hoggard without hesitation.

 

[vic_orthdox]

so overall its fairly even, but which tail do u think will do better???

The point is, you said it was easily Australia's. But it's not "easily" - that's why he said it was biased rubbish.

 

[FaaipDeOiad]

Now, this is a tail.

The funny thing is, the opposition has a quality batsman in Cairns at 8, and Vettori coming in at 10! In fact, from what I remember of O'connor, he wasn't a bad batsman either.

 

[marc71178]

Now, this is a tail.

Starting at 6, must be a new International record!

 

[greg]

This one had a lot of potential...

http://uk.cricinfo.com/db/ARCHIVE/1994-95/ENG_IN_AUS/ENG_AUS_T4_26-30JAN1995.html

 

[howardj]

This one had a lot of potential...

http://uk.cricinfo.com/db/ARCHIVE/1994-95/ENG_IN_AUS/ENG_AUS_T4_26-30JAN1995.html

Hell yeah! Swap Thorpe and Gatt around, and it started at 2nd drop.

 

[howardj]

This one had a lot of potential...

http://uk.cricinfo.com/db/ARCHIVE/1994-95/ENG_IN_AUS/ENG_AUS_T4_26-30JAN1995.html

Actually, are you talking about Australia or England, because Blewett - and anything below him - easily qualify!

 

[Steulen]

Starting at 6, must be a new International record!

That's a bit harsh on dear old Ramps

 

[age_master]

maybe, but i would say that it went pretty much the whole way down, with Stewart and Thorpe the only exceptions

 

[Linda]

Hahaha.. Im sure a while back I said Chris Rogers was next in line for Haydens and Langers possie. Nice that it could still come to fruition after all this time

 

[Neil Pickup]

maybe, but i would say that it went pretty much the whole way down, with Stewart and Thorpe the only exceptions

You really have to wonder how we won that Test, then...

 

[steds]

That's a bit harsh on dear old Ramps

But it isn't.

 

[steds]

You really have to wonder how we won that Test, then...

We didn't

 

[tooextracool]

Now, this is a tail.

ahh the good ol days.......

 

[tooextracool]

Starting at 6, must be a new International record!

darren maddy bats at 2 though.

 

[tooextracool]

You really have to wonder how we won that Test, then...

err we had botham...
i mean lewis.....
i mean defreitas

 

[Magrat Garlick]

You really have to wonder how we won , then...

We didn't

Result: England won by 106 runs

It is thus proven, sean can't read...

 

[aussie]

The point is, you said it was easily Australia's. But it's not "easily" - that's why he said it was biased rubbish.

oh ok, well then thats my blunder..